APHC010424442025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3311]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

Tuesday, the Sixteenth day of December, Two Thousand and Twenty Five Present The Honourable Ms. Justice B.S. Bhanumathi Writ Petition No.22112 of 2025 Between:

Korla Ravikumar ...Petitioner and The State of Andhra Pradesh and others ...Respondents Counsel for the petitioner:

1. Arun Showri.G Counsel for the respondents:

1. G.P. for Forests The Court made the following:

ORDER

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue any appropriate Writ, order or direction preferably a writ in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to the respondents to process the application for saw mill licence, dated 16.12.2024 as per rules and issue licence which is pending for long due to inaction of respondents which is illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and pass such other order or orders as this Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

2. The case of the writ petitioner, briefly stated, is as follows:

a. Smt. K.Kalavathi, the mother of the petitioner was the original licencee of M/s. Sridevi Mahalaxmi Sawmill. On 15.12.2014, she executed a power of attorney in favour of the petitioner authorizing him to run the saw-mill and handle all related matters. Since then, the petitioner has been managing the saw-mill. Later, the sawmill, with its machinery and land, was transferred to the petitioner through a registered settlement deed No.455 of 2017, dated 23.03.2017. All the family members provided their explicit consent for transfer of license on 27.09.2019. Despite repeated representations of the petitioner, the licence has not been transferred in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner filed W.P.No.4471 of 2022. This Court directed the State Level Committee (S.L.C.) to dispose of the appeal, dated 16.08.2022, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of that order. During the eighteenth meeting of S.L.C., it was incorrectly concluded that no appeal was pending stating that the appeal of the petitioner to the Chief Conservator of Forests had already been disposed of. The S.L.C. is the competent authority to address issues relating to the saw mills, yet, failed to perform the duty. The representation of the petitioner, dated 29.01.2024, still remains pending. The petitioner filed another writ petition in W.P.No.7323 of 2024 challenging the rejection order of the respondents. The writ petition was disposed of with an observation that further action should be taken only after the disposal of the civil suit, vide O.S.No.45 of 2022 on the file of the Court of the Junior Civil Judge, Palasa, filed by the mother of the petitioner for cancellation of the settlement deed, dated 23.03.2017. However, there is no interim order passed staying the effect of the settlement deed. Therefore, the deed remains valid and in force. The petitioner filed Writ Appeal in W.A.No.936 of 2024 as the observation in the writ order was at variance with the prayer sought in the petition. The appeal was rejected at the admission stage without a proper hearing.

b. While the things stood thus, the respondent No.4 / District Forest Officer, Srikakulam, through a letter, dated 19.11.2024, (Ref.No.456/2005/A7) informed the petitioner that the petitioner cannot operate the saw mill without the consent of the original licence holder. Despite the fact that the brother of the petitioner, by name, Korla Chandrasekhar, had informed the respondent No.4 that he had consented to the transfer of licence under the settlement deed and ‘no objection certificate’ of family members had been provided. The interference of the respondent No.4 is unjust. As per the A.P. Wood Based Industries (Establishment & Regulation) Rules, 2018 (hereinafter referred as the ‘Rules, 2018’), the licence of Smt. K.Kalavathi lapsed after 60 days from 11.05.2018 as she had not applied for a new lic